Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Transgender stuff - what's going on?


Gym Beglin
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, John102 said:

They are an irrefutable marker of what we accept to be biologically male and female. There is an incredible amount of genetic diversity within this that you allude to with Phelps and Bolt, though this is diversity within the category that both men and women accept when they compete. Otherwise why split men and women at all. For me, if you are going to split the sexes and compete on that basis, you have to split them on the basis of what fundamentally makes them male and female and that is at a chromosomal level. Not what they look like, whether they wear make up or want to use the female toilets.  

That's only happening in a limited number of schools. At every other level of competition, transgender athletes have to undergo hormone treatment. And again, the alternative is you exclude already maginalised and vulnerable young people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, moof said:

Just curious 

Bi-curious? 

2 hours ago, moof said:

Serena Williams has a physical and genetic advantage over most other tennis players, should she have to compete against men?

 

this is an incredibly murky topic 

No, dude. She shouldn’t. She’s genetically a female and the sport happens to be separated into male and female categories. Whether we like it or not, those are the categories. Somebody genetically fitting that category competing in it, like Serena, isn’t the same as somebody who doesn’t (like a trans-woman who was born a male, developed as a male, etc.). 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Section_31 said:

One of the things that does my head in about this type of thing is that you can't have a debate without walking on eggshells or coming under attack.

 

"Sharon Davies just said men shouldn't be allowed to swim in women's races - the Internet responded!"

 

As I said earlier up the thread, there's probably a core of people impacted by this who have struggled mentally with it and if they can get some sort of peace by going through the process then great. 

 

But as with many things these days it's been hijacked by people who equate appearing to be liberal with intelligence, and like to use it to appear somehow intellectually of morally superior when in actual fact, beyond the realms of Twitter of hipster beer garden chat, they don't give a toss either way.

Good post,

 

I see the whole Scarlett Johansson argument has reared its head again on Twitter, over her casting previously as a transgender character in a film and her subsequently pulling out of the role.

 

I can't recall seeing the same amount of uproar when Jared Leto was cast and then actually portrayed a transgender character in Dallas Buyers Club a handful of years ago.

 

It comes across that most of the internet 'reaction' is just noise for the sake of making it. I doubt most people not actually affected by some of the topics these days are even as offended as some of their posts suggest.

 

Not downplaying the view of anyone actually impacted by any topic that's up for debate, it's the other 'seriously offended' people I'm referring to.

 

......And I'm not referring to people on this forum, on about Twitter, social media and some media outlets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Juniper said:

Good post,

 

I see the whole Scarlett Johansson argument has reared its head again on Twitter, over her casting previously as a transgender character in a film and her subsequently pulling out of the role.

 

I can't recall seeing the same amount of uproar when Jared Leto was cast and then actually portrayed a transgender character in Dallas Buyers Club a handful of years ago.

 

It comes across that most of the internet 'reaction' is just noise for the sake of making it. I doubt most people not actually affected by some of the topics these days are even as offended as some of their posts suggest.

 

Not downplaying the view of anyone actually impacted by any topic that's up for debate, it's the other 'seriously offended' people I'm referring to.

 

......And I'm not referring to people on this forum, on about Twitter, social media and some media outlets.

Ricky Gervais makes that point well. When there’s outrage probably a handful of people are bothered. Most couldn’t give a fuck. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TK421 said:

Excellent post, Juniper.  

 

It's like when some arsehole gets all precious about "antisemitism" in the Labour Party when in reality they don't give a fuck. 

Spot on. Like those cunts banging on about Palestine all the time.  Like they care.  

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody actually cares about anything, we are varying degrees of sociopath without the capacity for empathy or general decency in trying to improve the lives of marginalised and oppressed people. It’s all just posturing for internet kudos. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To further extend the ridiculous arguments, if one day someone somewhere decides that any person can self identify as "para" and it's commonly accepted and made legal, should they be allowed to compete in the Paralympics? 

 

Excluding trans women from female sports does not mean that you have to accept they be excluded from other aspects of life and society as someone alluded to earlier, that suggestion is provocative nonsense.  Having said that I don't believe trans should be excluded from female sport altogether, just that the guidelines and thresholds should be clearer and more stringent.   Someone mentioned 40 years of evidence shows this issue is not a big deal, but that's a skewed argument since trans rights have only been a hot topic and much more accepted for a few years if that, I think it should be researched and addressed fully before the horse bolts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, moof said:

Nobody actually cares about anything, we are varying degrees of sociopath without the capacity for empathy or general decency in trying to improve the lives of marginalised and oppressed people. It’s all just posturing for internet kudos. 

luke-skywalker-i-care-meme.jpg

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, moof said:

Nobody actually cares about anything, we are varying degrees of sociopath without the capacity for empathy or general decency in trying to improve the lives of marginalised and oppressed people. It’s all just posturing for internet kudos. 

You’re missing my point.

 

Not on about the people who are genuinely offended/trying to make a change...etc which was a point I made in my post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Moo said:

To further extend the ridiculous arguments, if one day someone somewhere decides that any person can self identify as "para" and it's commonly accepted and made legal, should they be allowed to compete in the Paralympics? 

 

Excluding trans women from female sports does not mean that you have to accept they be excluded from other aspects of life and society as someone alluded to earlier, that suggestion is provocative nonsense.  Having said that I don't believe trans should be excluded from female sport altogether, just that the guidelines and thresholds should be clearer and more stringent.   Someone mentioned 40 years of evidence shows this issue is not a big deal, but that's a skewed argument since trans rights have only been a hot topic and much more accepted for a few years if that, I think it should be researched and addressed fully before the horse bolts. 

Few points:

 

1). Men can't just "decide" to compete against women, and then be allowed to do so. This is a fairly basic error, and if you're making it, it suggests you don't really understand what you're talking about.

 

2). Nobody has suggested excluding transgender people from sports meant "you have to accept they be excluded from other aspects of life and society". Nobody. So I actually agree with your claim it's a ridiculous argument, but you should probably be aware that the only person making it, and arguing against it, is you.

 

3). Transgender athletes have been competing in top level sport for over four decades, and the IOC guidelines have been in place for sixteen. These are both categorical facts. If you're not aware of them, it doesn't make then any less correct, or relevant. How long you think this issue has been a "hot topic" has nothing to do with it, and is frankly a bizarre point to make. These things happened.

 

4). The view that "trans rights have only been accepted for a few years" is also just ahistorical nonsense, I'm afraid, and even the most cursory bit of research would tell you that.

 

5). The guidelines and thresholds are clear (it's literally a couple of lines), so I'm not sure why you find them not to be? Which bit specifically is giving you trouble? The data would also suggest they're stringent enough. Why do you think they aren't?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Duff Man said:

Few points:

 

1). Men can't just "decide" to compete against women, and then be allowed to do so. This is a fairly basic error, and if you're making it, it suggests you don't really understand what you're talking about.

 

2). Nobody has suggested excluding transgender people from sports meant "you have to accept they be excluded from other aspects of life and society". Nobody. So I actually agree with your claim it's a ridiculous argument, but you should probably be aware that the only person making it, and arguing against it, is you.

 

3). Transgender athletes have been competing in top level sport for over four decades, and the IOC guidelines have been in place for sixteen. These are both categorical facts. If you're not aware of them, it doesn't make then any less correct, or relevant. How long you think this issue has been a "hot topic" has nothing to do with it, and is frankly a bizarre point to make. These things happened.

 

4). The view that "trans rights have only been accepted for a few years" is also just ahistorical nonsense, I'm afraid, and even the most cursory bit of research would tell you that.

 

5). The guidelines and thresholds are clear (it's literally a couple of lines), so I'm not sure why you find them not to be? Which bit specifically is giving you trouble? The data would also suggest they're stringent enough. Why do you think they aren't?

1) I did not suggest they could just decide to compete [in the Paralympics], I suggested there may come a time when people could self identify as "para" which could open the door to competing in the Paralympics. A ridiculous argument perhaps, I said as much myself, but it followed the suggestion that there's always physical inequality in sport, Michael Phelps was cited, and that makes it okay, so I was using other potential examples to extend the argument further. 

 

2) Perhaps a misunderstanding, I thought I'd read it somewhere. 

 

3&4) I wasn't aware that this had been happening for 40 years.  However I do think it's relevant how long trans rights have been widely accepted as history would suggest visibility matters, and with visibility comes more participation and more integration.  Therefore it's likely we'll see it a lot more. 

 

5) I'm concerned that female athletes are concerned, tell me why they would be concerned if the evidence shows trans athletes have no advantage? 

A poster mentioned earlier, in respect of the rules on testosterone levels that it's 10nmols, and that a woman's normal range is 0-2nmols, and normal for a man can range from 7nmols. 

If that's true then that bit is of particular concern for me.  Tell me why it shouldn't be? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interestingly further reading has just told me that the current IOC guidelines on transgender athletes has not been in place for 16 years, it's only 4 years. 

The original ruling was made 16 years ago but updated in 2015 and as a result is now much more relaxed. 

The author of the article I've just read suggested that the relaxing of the rules in 2015 was politically led and not backed up by science. 

I'm now going to try to find an article that debunks this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Moo said:

...

 

5) I'm concerned that female athletes are concerned, tell me why they would be concerned if the evidence shows trans athletes have no advantage? 

A poster mentioned earlier, in respect of the rules on testosterone levels that it's 10nmols, and that a woman's normal range is 0-2nmols, and normal for a man can range from 7nmols. 

If that's true then that bit is of particular concern for me.  Tell me why it shouldn't be? 

 

You said the guidelines weren't stringent enough. Are you basing that solely on the concerns of female athletes? That doesn't sound very scientific, and is at odds with your view that "it should be researched and addressed fully", not to mention historical precedent.

 

And the issue has been researched, by people qualified to do so. If you disagree with them, fine, but to be taken seriously your argument needs to have a little bit more weight than "female athletes are concerned", which, by the way, isn't even an opinion that's held universally among other female athletes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, moof said:

Nobody actually cares about anything, we are varying degrees of sociopath without the capacity for empathy or general decency in trying to improve the lives of marginalised and oppressed people. It’s all just posturing for internet kudos. 

Very self-aware on your part, there.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...